9 ms·

Any idea when or how these additional 700 regulations will be published?

at-fates-hands 12y ago
Two of the dissenting commissioners attempted to get the bill published so people could see how bad it was going to be - without success. Also add in the fact the FCC is supposed to be a independent office, and Obama has been meddling them since he got into office: http://reason.com/archives/2015/02/25/fccs-ajit-pai-on-net-neutrality-a-soluti/ http://reason.com/archives/2015/02/25/fccs-ajit-pai-on-net-n... Regulating the internet like a utility is quite possibly the worst thing you can imagine, and now its come to reality.
- supergeek133 12y ago
  This is what scares me, what was there to hide?
  - ubernostrum 12y ago
    There isn't. Everything gets published. The vote on the rule change came after a public comment period. This thread is just full of HN's intellectually-challenged users waving their hands and saying "ooooOOOOoooo GOVERNMENT! SCARY GOVERNMENT! BE AFRAID OF SCARY GOVERNMENT! ooooOOOOoooo!"
    - ForHackernews 12y ago
      I don't even think it's HN users. There's a bunch of zero-day accounts in here parroting anti-NN talking points.
    - TallGuyShort 12y ago
      Can you provide a link to the 700 regulations? Can't find one anywhere else.
      - ForHackernews 12y ago
        The full regulations should be published within the next few days. They won't go into effect immediately, and the public (and Congress) will certainly get to comment, and suggest revisions.
      - TallGuyShort 12y ago
        Holy hell - why the down votes? "Everything is public" made it sound like the regulations had been published. I just wanted to know where. What's wrong with asking for a citation?
        supergeek133 12y ago
        I'm with you, it's like asking for the ability to read something is blasphemous. Never did either of us say we were against it, but the flood of downvotes. Oh my.
    - at-fates-hands 12y ago
      So this doesn't scare you at all? The plan gives a Washington bureaucracy a blank check to decide how Internet service providers deploy and manage their networks, from the last mile all the way through the Internet backbone. Take interconnection as just one example. The plan states that the FCC can determine when a broadband provider must establish physical interconnection points, where they must locate those points, how much they can charge for the provision of that infrastructure, and how they will route traffic over those connections. That is anything but light touch regulation. And the plan extends the FCC’s interventionist gaze well beyond this part of the network. Small wonder that some pro-regulation activists are already deeming the FCC the “Department of the Internet. http://www.fcc.gov/document/comm-pai-press-stmt-president-obamas-plan-regulate-internet http://www.fcc.gov/document/comm-pai-press-stmt-president-ob...
      - ubernostrum 12y ago
        Doesn't scare me a bit, because I know the secret formula. Every night after I brush my teeth, I stand in front of the mirror and yell "LIBERAL FARTBONGO OBUMMER" five times; that magic incantation keeps the black helicopters from coming to force me to use the internet the way they want me to, and also protects my guns and repeals the entire income tax code.
      - NickNameNick 12y ago
        Good, maybe comcast will finally update those oversaturated interconnects that they engineered to force netflix to pay them for access to their customers.
    - 011100000110010 12y ago
      Social media personas http://www.theguardian.com/environment/georgemonbiot/2011/feb/23/need-to-protect-internet-from-astroturfing http://www.theguardian.com/environment/georgemonbiot/2011/fe... http://boingboing.net/2011/02/18/hbgarys-high-volume.html http://boingboing.net/2011/02/18/hbgarys-high-volume.html
- ForHackernews 12y ago
  > Regulating the internet like a utility is quite possibly the worst thing you can imagine, and now its come to reality. Why? My electricity and water work a hell of a lot better than my cable internet.
  - deleted 12y ago
    [deleted]
    - ForHackernews 12y ago
      In many states, power-production has been decoupled from power-delivery. For example, in Illinois[0], customers can choose which company to buy their power from but maintaining the lines and delivering that power is still the responsibility of Commonwealth Edison, the old monopoly utility. This seems like a reasonable compromise to me, and it's not that dissimilar from Comcast delivering my packets, while I choose to buy my content from Netflix or Hulu or Amazon. [0] http://www.pluginillinois.org/default.aspx http://www.pluginillinois.org/default.aspx
  - paulhauggis 12y ago
    Yes, but both electricity and water don't really require innovation in the future. I can't remember the last time I wanted higher speed water in my house.
    - ForHackernews 12y ago
      You almost couldn't be more wrong about that. Providing electricity and water are both massively complex undertakings, and ongoing innovation[0] is crucial to providing service for a growing population, and meeting the ecological challenges of tomorrow. California is in the middle of an epochal drought[1], and you're saying we don't need innovation in water? [0] http://energy.gov/oe/services/technology-development/smart-grid http://energy.gov/oe/services/technology-development/smart-g... [1] http://ca.gov/drought/ http://ca.gov/drought/
    - FireBeyond 12y ago
      Right. We have zero issues with water availability in the world. I guess those billions being poured into desalination, water recycling and alternatives are all, forgive the pun, money down the drain? And you're absolutely right - we have zero need for alternative energy sources (although on that, it's kinda true - I've no particular issue with nuclear fission per se, though we need to figure out something better in regards to storage, and nuclear fusion is something that merits a huge deal of research into commercial viability).
- dragonwriter 12y ago
  > Two of the dissenting commissioners attempted to get the bill published There is no bill. And, under the normal regulatory process, there is nothing to be published until the authority responsible for regulation approves something -- its true that the FCC could have delayed action and issued another NPRM. But regulations are published fairly quickly once adopted by the issuing authority, not generally effective immediately, and subject to revision by the issuing authority or overriding by Congress once they are published, so the idea that this will go into effect without people knowing what is in it is incorrect, as is the idea that there is anything unusual about the process here. Having failed to drum up opposition to the general idea of regulation, opponents have attempted to paint the process as unusual and nefarious, but that just isn't an argument that has a grounding in reality. > Regulating the internet like a utility is quite possibly the worst thing you can imagine Even the worst possible regulation of the internet isn't even in the top 50% of the worst things I can imagine.
dragonwriter 12y ago
> Any idea when or how these additional 700 regulations will be published? If the past experience on similar FCC actions (including, e.g., the last Open Internet Report and Order) is a good guide, they'll be published in the next several days, and the biggest delay in getting them published will be the opposing commissioners getting finished writing up their dissenting views, which will be published alongside what is adopted.
- dd36 12y ago
  *Comcast getting finished writing their dissenting views...

Two of the dissenting commissioners attempted to get the bill published so people could see how bad it was going to be - without success. Also add in the fact the FCC is supposed to be a independent office, and Obama has been meddling them since he got into office: http://reason.com/archives/2015/02/25/fccs-ajit-pai-on-net-neutrality-a-soluti/ http://reason.com/archives/2015/02/25/fccs-ajit-pai-on-net-n... Regulating the internet like a utility is quite possibly the worst thing you can imagine, and now its come to reality.

supergeek133 12y ago
This is what scares me, what was there to hide?
- ubernostrum 12y ago
  There isn't. Everything gets published. The vote on the rule change came after a public comment period. This thread is just full of HN's intellectually-challenged users waving their hands and saying "ooooOOOOoooo GOVERNMENT! SCARY GOVERNMENT! BE AFRAID OF SCARY GOVERNMENT! ooooOOOOoooo!"
  - ForHackernews 12y ago
    I don't even think it's HN users. There's a bunch of zero-day accounts in here parroting anti-NN talking points.
  - TallGuyShort 12y ago
    Can you provide a link to the 700 regulations? Can't find one anywhere else.
    - ForHackernews 12y ago
      The full regulations should be published within the next few days. They won't go into effect immediately, and the public (and Congress) will certainly get to comment, and suggest revisions.
    - TallGuyShort 12y ago
      Holy hell - why the down votes? "Everything is public" made it sound like the regulations had been published. I just wanted to know where. What's wrong with asking for a citation?
      - supergeek133 12y ago
        I'm with you, it's like asking for the ability to read something is blasphemous. Never did either of us say we were against it, but the flood of downvotes. Oh my.
  - at-fates-hands 12y ago
    So this doesn't scare you at all? The plan gives a Washington bureaucracy a blank check to decide how Internet service providers deploy and manage their networks, from the last mile all the way through the Internet backbone. Take interconnection as just one example. The plan states that the FCC can determine when a broadband provider must establish physical interconnection points, where they must locate those points, how much they can charge for the provision of that infrastructure, and how they will route traffic over those connections. That is anything but light touch regulation. And the plan extends the FCC’s interventionist gaze well beyond this part of the network. Small wonder that some pro-regulation activists are already deeming the FCC the “Department of the Internet. http://www.fcc.gov/document/comm-pai-press-stmt-president-obamas-plan-regulate-internet http://www.fcc.gov/document/comm-pai-press-stmt-president-ob...
    - ubernostrum 12y ago
      Doesn't scare me a bit, because I know the secret formula. Every night after I brush my teeth, I stand in front of the mirror and yell "LIBERAL FARTBONGO OBUMMER" five times; that magic incantation keeps the black helicopters from coming to force me to use the internet the way they want me to, and also protects my guns and repeals the entire income tax code.
    - NickNameNick 12y ago
      Good, maybe comcast will finally update those oversaturated interconnects that they engineered to force netflix to pay them for access to their customers.
  - 011100000110010 12y ago
    Social media personas http://www.theguardian.com/environment/georgemonbiot/2011/feb/23/need-to-protect-internet-from-astroturfing http://www.theguardian.com/environment/georgemonbiot/2011/fe... http://boingboing.net/2011/02/18/hbgarys-high-volume.html http://boingboing.net/2011/02/18/hbgarys-high-volume.html
ForHackernews 12y ago
> Regulating the internet like a utility is quite possibly the worst thing you can imagine, and now its come to reality. Why? My electricity and water work a hell of a lot better than my cable internet.
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
  - ForHackernews 12y ago
    In many states, power-production has been decoupled from power-delivery. For example, in Illinois[0], customers can choose which company to buy their power from but maintaining the lines and delivering that power is still the responsibility of Commonwealth Edison, the old monopoly utility. This seems like a reasonable compromise to me, and it's not that dissimilar from Comcast delivering my packets, while I choose to buy my content from Netflix or Hulu or Amazon. [0] http://www.pluginillinois.org/default.aspx http://www.pluginillinois.org/default.aspx
- paulhauggis 12y ago
  Yes, but both electricity and water don't really require innovation in the future. I can't remember the last time I wanted higher speed water in my house.
  - ForHackernews 12y ago
    You almost couldn't be more wrong about that. Providing electricity and water are both massively complex undertakings, and ongoing innovation[0] is crucial to providing service for a growing population, and meeting the ecological challenges of tomorrow. California is in the middle of an epochal drought[1], and you're saying we don't need innovation in water? [0] http://energy.gov/oe/services/technology-development/smart-grid http://energy.gov/oe/services/technology-development/smart-g... [1] http://ca.gov/drought/ http://ca.gov/drought/
  - FireBeyond 12y ago
    Right. We have zero issues with water availability in the world. I guess those billions being poured into desalination, water recycling and alternatives are all, forgive the pun, money down the drain? And you're absolutely right - we have zero need for alternative energy sources (although on that, it's kinda true - I've no particular issue with nuclear fission per se, though we need to figure out something better in regards to storage, and nuclear fusion is something that merits a huge deal of research into commercial viability).
dragonwriter 12y ago
> Two of the dissenting commissioners attempted to get the bill published There is no bill. And, under the normal regulatory process, there is nothing to be published until the authority responsible for regulation approves something -- its true that the FCC could have delayed action and issued another NPRM. But regulations are published fairly quickly once adopted by the issuing authority, not generally effective immediately, and subject to revision by the issuing authority or overriding by Congress once they are published, so the idea that this will go into effect without people knowing what is in it is incorrect, as is the idea that there is anything unusual about the process here. Having failed to drum up opposition to the general idea of regulation, opponents have attempted to paint the process as unusual and nefarious, but that just isn't an argument that has a grounding in reality. > Regulating the internet like a utility is quite possibly the worst thing you can imagine Even the worst possible regulation of the internet isn't even in the top 50% of the worst things I can imagine.

dragonwriter 12y ago

> Any idea when or how these additional 700 regulations will be published? If the past experience on similar FCC actions (including, e.g., the last Open Internet Report and Order) is a good guide, they'll be published in the next several days, and the biggest delay in getting them published will be the opposing commissioners getting finished writing up their dissenting views, which will be published alongside what is adopted.

dd36 12y ago
*Comcast getting finished writing their dissenting views...